Source: FLCCC Alliance Community Author: Joyce Kamen Since January, 2020, Dr. Paul Marik, a tenured professor of medicine, has worked non-stop to try to understand
Recently Merck issued a stern warning that seemed written by marketing, Kory says, “as it had no scientific data to support the conclusion,” that ivermectin was suddenly dangerous. Another pharmaceutical company’s CEO privately noted that “People must think Merck knows what they’re talking about because it’s their drug,” but Merck has “tremendous disincentives” to say nice things about the generic pill, as it has already spent hundreds of millions of dollars developing an oral anti-viral COVID-19 treatment, rival to ivermectin, that may be priced at $3,000 a dose.
They also restricted the use of essential off-label and generic drugs with blatant disinformation campaigns that reminded Kory of big tobacco’s efforts to hide the dangers of smoking. In effect, the public health authorities eliminated the full toolbox of essential scientific methods and drugs that doctors use every day, including the most effective early, prophylactic, and late-stage treatments for COVID-19, which were developed by frontline doctors, not pharmaceutical companies.
Dr. Pierre Kory gives a clinic on big pharma’s capture of mainstream media, big tech, medical journals, and governments. “They don’t care if people die.”
Finally, the AG asks why: “Why would the government want to discourage doctors working with their patients to try to find drugs that can therapeutically heal American citizens, especially when they are more effective and cost-effective?”
In nations around the world tension mounts between physicians and caregivers seeking to prescribe what they professionally deem as safe doses of ivermectin, as an off-label treatment for COVID-19 and national health authorities, which for the most part have all taken a hostile and oppositional position against the use of the drug.
And why is ivermectin being so negatively targeted by Big Tech and Big Media? One could argue conflict of interest plays a major role, given how intertwined they are with Big Pharma and the far-reaching grasp of the BMGF. A cheap and effective early treatment for Covid-19, like ivermectin, can be seen as a significant threat to the financial interests of those involved with Covid vaccines and expensive anti-viral drugs.
Source: Trial Site News Yet another ivermectin lawsuit was launched, this time in South Florida, as a Ryan Drock seeks to compel a local hospital,
The data here comes from five nations, and my spreadsheet included a national comparison where the 0.09% case fatality rate (CFR) among patients receiving hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, and zinc was 98% lower than the case-weighted CFR of those five nations.
The May 2021 issue of Antibiotics Review, for example, put out a metanalysis of ivermectin which showed that 100% of 36 prophylaxis and early treatment studies showed positive results, and 26 of the studies showed “statistically significant improvements.”
Buried in the note is the real reason for making ivermectin inaccessible – the fear that persons taking it ‘may elect not to be vaccinated as part of the national Covid-19 vaccination program’. This is outrageous. When someone is infected with Covid, it is too late to bother with vaccination. They need early treatment. To deny it to coerce them into accepting a vaccine, one of whose side-effects is death, is immoral.
It is irresponsible to exclude IVM as a drug to control high numbers of infections that will be encountered as Australia moves out of its “bubble”, irrespective of the level of vaccination.
Australia’s medicine and therapeutic regulatory, the Therapeutic Good Administration (TGA) recently took the gloves off with Ivermectin, the economical anti-parasitic drug associated with at least 63 completed clinical trials involving SARS-CoV-2, the virus behind COVID-19. Now TGA formally places a national prohibition on off-label prescribing of ivermectin to all general practitioners. A comparable move as to what TGA did with hydroxychloroquine in 2020. Clearly further evidence of tightening encroachment of the critically important doctor-patient treatment relationship allowing consent to medical treatment using off-label medications. Of course, this isn’t occurring in a vacuum—it’s part of an unfolding, integrated and what have the signs of a coordinated and orchestrated government action to stop any and all treatments other than those the government declares acceptable.
They got the medicine from Nurse Practitioner Sharell Marlitz who says she has prescribed the drug to nearly 2,000 patients. She says 600 of them were severe cases. She combines that with other medications depending on the case like Zinc and Vitamin C.
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: I don’t think there is room for debate about the issues that the member for Hughes is raising. He’s entitled to put his point of view. He’s as relevant as I suspect he is going to be. I’d like him to continue.
We are pleased to present a webinar about a crucial topic: the early treatment of those catching COVID-19, especially with the Delta variant. The Delta, which represents the vast majority of new cases in the US and many other countries, requires indeed a slightly different approach for its early treatment.
An in-depth interview with Dr. Tess Lawrie of EBMC Squared describing the effectiveness of long-time safe medicine ivermectin to treat and prevent covid and how health authorities are systematically ignoring the evidence.
Just as Galileo proved with his telescope that the earth was NOT the center of the Universe in 1616; today, the data from India shows that Ivermectin is effective, much more so than the vaccines. It not only prevents death, but it also prevents COVID infections, and it also is effective against the Delta Variant.
Borody’s ivermectin triple therapy prophylactic is the perfect solution. It reduces transmission immediately, regardless of the variant, by preventing the virus from entering a person’s cells. It also shortens time spent in quarantine and reduces transmission to close contacts. Early treatment dramatically reduces hospitalisation and mortality and would rapidly end the Sydney wave, as similar therapies did in Mexico and India. It would also put an end to any need for masks and lockdowns.
The heated debate on the use of Ivermectin to treat COVID-19 continued yesterday when outspoken reggae artiste Tanya Stephens questioned the relevance of not allowing people to decide for themselves what they wish to take to reduce symptoms.
I am undergoing a brutal cancelation and moral assassination attempt at my university for defending early treatment. Early treatment is effective and denying it today is causing death and suffering.
Dr. Vladimir Zelenko talks with author John Leake about treating his patients for Covid-19 and then sharing his insight with the White House. In spite of (or because of) President Trump’s initial embrace of Dr. Zelenko’s treatment protocol, government agencies such as the NIH and FDA first dismissed it, and then prevented public access to its key ingredient, hydroxychloroquine. This deliberate suppression of a life saving medication led to the preventable deaths of hundreds of thousands of Americans.
The death rate from COVID-19 is dramatically low at United Memorial Medical Center in Houston, TX compared to other hospitals across the nation and the world. Despite Dr. Joseph Varon’s popularity on TV, news personalities avoid questions of why he’s having success treating his patients. As it turns out, he’s using drugs the WHO and CDC recommend against.
Dr Patrick Phillips MD regarding Covid-19 Treatment… “Seeing what’s happened with the Ontario Science Table, not recommending Ivermectin, even recommending against Vitamin D, which I think is unthinkable, because the harm is none. This is a natural substance and they’re telling us NOT to give this to these patients despite mortality benefit. I know there is something going wrong and I knew I needed to speak out no matter what the college does to my license.”
Reporter Ivory Hecker says reporting on hydroxychloroquine was censored at her station, the local Fox affiliate in Houston.
“For science to work, you have to have an open exchange of ideas,” Bhattacharya said of the censorship. “If you’re going to make an argument that something is misinformation, you should provide an actual argument. You can’t just take it down and say, ‘Oh, it’s misinformation’ without actually giving a reason.
In absolute honesty, I don’t think vaccines are even necessary. Why are they not necessary? Well that’s because there are at least four or five safe and effective medicines and their presence has been suppressed and hidden from the public, so they’re not really necessary.
Ivermectin is on the WHO’s list of essential medicines and has a high safety profile with more than 3.7 billion doses having been distributed in more than 30 years.
This is pulled straight from the same playbook as the propaganda against HCQ. Even if you’re not sure that one or both of these medicines is effective despite uniformly positive results when applied as early treatment, you should at least recognize the pattern, scratch your head, and question whether there is…maybe…just possibly some perverse incentive like power or profit from vaccines driving this absurdity.
In a letter dated the 23rd of April, 2021, four Guest Editors publicly resigned from the journal Frontiers in Pharmacology. Professor Maria Cristina Albertini, Professor Piero Sestili, Dr. Robert Malone, and Dr. Howard Haimes stepped down in protest over executive decisions not to publish two papers showing positive results of various agents in protecting against or treating COVID-19.
Bret, Pierre, Heather, and a large number of internet pundits make a great case that suppression of ivermectin is a large, gross, and inhumane crime. However, this is not the “crime of the century”. The crime of the century is far larger, or rather more systemic.
With ivermectin now on the national Indian COVID-19 list of recommended treatments for COVID-19, a few states have gone to the next level and included the low-cost, generic drug approved throughout the world as a parasite fighter as a prophylactic targeting SARS-CoV-2, the virus behind COVID-19.
Doctors have found safe, effective and inexpensive treatments that work well in preventing and treating patients with COVID-19 like Ivermectin that’s been used safely for more than 30 years.
But the government has not supported the use of this effective drug. In fact, there are other therapies like hydroxychloroquine, vitamins D and C and zinc that physicians have found to be safe and effective in preventing and treating COVID.
Dr. Pierre Kory explain both the case that ivermectin (IVM) effectively prevents or treats COVID-19, and also how and why that information is withheld by public health officials.
Independent Federal MP Craig Kelly has hit back at Facebook after it permanently deleted his official page. “This is the electronic version of book burning where they simply don’t like what I say,” he told Ben Fordham.
It is high time to open our eyes, to hold our governments to account, and to fundamentally reform a system that has been misled by the interests of the all-powerful pharmaceutical industry. ”
It would be a historically amazing feat of maneuvering bureaucracy, worthy of its own epic book, movie, or perhaps a campfire song, to have wrangled that much data out of those hospitals with highly variable regulations and procedures, nearly all of which are in the U.S. healthcare system.
Dr. Steven Hatfill, infectious disease expert, says the medical bureaucracy blocked an effective treatment in hydroxychloroquine so they could push through experimental vaccines.
Ivermectin, a medicine for parasites, has been around for four decades. While not authorized for use against COVID-19, dozens of studies show materially positive results. At well-established human dosage levels, the drug is safe: hundreds of millions of people are treated with it every year mostly in the tropics for various parasite-borne diseases, such as River Blindness in Nigeria.
Immediately following HCQ’s Trump moment, the media went on an all-out blitz to associate the topic of HCQ with a sense of fear. Fear of Trump, fear of death, fear of incompetence, fear of opposing scientific authorities, fear of using medicine needed by somebody else, and fear of the unknown. And the campaign of fear didn’t stop there.
